Even while people are alive, a huge proportion of our full experience of them involves expectations, assumptions, recollection, expectation…in addition to direct interaction.
Post-life, we mist remove the direct interaction, but the rest remains. Talk away!
I think it depends on what you are expecting out of the conversation. The chances are they will be excellent listeners. Buf that’s about it unless something is wrong with them or you.
Yes. So can I, or so can any man: But when you talk to them, will they answer?
So what is the practical use of ouija board?
It is a toy, it can be fun at parties.
For Milton Bradly to make money.
It has no use to me; ask someone who has passed on, they might feel differently.
In your dreams.
Strictly no. Deepfake alert!
Yes, but please don’t talk to them on Facebook. About them is ok. To them is fucking weird and creepy!
If there was a way, there’d be huge corporations offering it as a service.
Well, some are certainly trying with AI.
No and anyone claiming they can is lying, mentally unwell or both.
Or they’re attempting to leverage a person’s grief for financial gain.
Which falls under ‘lying’ category.
I agree, but I figured I’d draw particular attention to this lie on the off chance that op was about to give a charlatan a sum of money in a misguided attempt to assuage some grief.
So which piece of technology or piece of science did you use to absolutely prove that there is no afterlife?
Which did you use to prove there is? What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
The problem is there is no way to prove there is or isn’t an after life. My point is that he’s acting like it’s already been proven.
If I tell you I’m your god and you should give me all your money or you won’t go to heaven, you will rightly call me a liar, even though you can’t really prove that I’m not.
You won’t say “oh I guess there’s no way to prove he’s not god, so I’d better give him my money”.
In science, the default stance on something existing is that it doesn’t, unless there’s solid proof, or at least a compelling scientific theory suggesting that it does.
He is not explicitly saying there is no afterlife, just that there is no way to communicate with a potential afterlife.
Oh. Good point. Guess I misread that
It seems you are absolutely sure that dead people cannot hear or understand you, so sure that you think there can be no wiggle room.
But did you know that during the French revolution, severed heads of those executed hours ago were known to open their eyes and look at people who spoke their name?
There must be a lot of wiggle room inside your skull to believe that utter rubbish.
It’s not hard to believe. It’s not like the neurons connecting the ears to Wernicke’s area magically disappear. The part of the brain which processes one’s name is known to have evolved earlier and is more basely integrated. And there’s no rule that says neurons cannot fire even once after death. Indeed, bodies are known to move or twitch hours after death – so why not there brain, where most of the body’s neurons are?
Arguments for and against: www (dot) cureus (dot) com/articles/133225-the-most-gentle-of-lethal-methods-the-question-of-retained-consciousness-following-decapitation#!/
Decapitation experiments of Louis: www (dot) cairn-int (dot) info/article-E_RHS_612_0333–the-debate-over-severed-heads.htm
“Languille!” he called out the criminal’s name. To his astonishment, the eyes lifted and “…fixed in a precise fashion on mind and the pupils adjusted… I had the impression that living eyes were looking at me”
(this isn’t hours later but it’s the first source I can find rn)
Some organisms have detectable brain activity 96 hours after death (nobody has done this experiment on a human) www (dot) sciencealert (dot) com/how-long-does-a-human-head-actually-remain-conscious-after-being-cut-off
I’m not claiming 100% that consciousness can return even for an instant after death. I just think there’s enough question marks here that it can’t be entirely ruled out.
source: i made it the fuck up
Seems like kind of a “you” question. Can you?
For what? In a literal, empirical sense, no, you can’t. But there could be underlying motives that can be addressed through alternative means
You can, but it’ll be a pretty one-sided conversation
You can, and it can be liberating, but they won’t talk back.
Yes, but they can’t talk back.
Sure, but don’t expect them to reply at that point.
Of course you can. But if you think they can reply, then you might have a problem.
I still talk to the mother of my children, more than 10 years after she passed. I tell her how they’re doing, and I ask her questions I know she cannot answer. I am an atheist so I know that of course there is no way she can hear me, but it’s not for her. It’s just for me. I hear her voice in my head, guiding and advising me. Now that they are all adults and living their own lives, I don’t talk to her as much as I used to, while they were younger.
